BACKGROUND: This study aimed to describe national intermediate-term admission rates for incisional hernia or clinically apparent adhesions following colorectal surgery, and to compare rates following laparoscopic and open approaches. METHODS: Patients undergoing primary colorectal resection between 2002 and 2008 were included from the Hospital Episode Statistics database. Subsequent inpatient admissions were extracted for up to 3 years after the initial operation or to the end of the study period. Outcomes examined were admissions with a diagnosis of, or operative interventions for, incisional hernia or adhesions. RESULTS: A total of 187 148 patients were included between 2002 and 2008, with median follow-up of 31·8 (interquartile range 13·1-35·3) months. Some 8885 (4·7 per cent) of these patients were admitted with a diagnosis of, or underwent a repair of, an incisional hernia. In multiple regression analysis, use of laparoscopy was not a predictor of operative intervention for incisional hernia (odds ratio 1·09, 95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 0·99 to 1·21; P = 0·083). Some 15 125 (8·1 per cent) of the patients were admitted with a diagnosis of adhesions or had a procedure for division of adhesions. Overall, 3·5 per cent (6637 of 187 148) of patients underwent adhesiolysis. Patients selected for a laparoscopic procedure had lower rates of admission for adhesions (6·3 per cent (692 of 11 013) for laparoscopic versus 8·2 per cent (14 433 of 176 135) for open surgery; P < 0·001) and reintervention for adhesions (2·8 per cent (305 of 11 013) versus 3·6 per cent (6325 of 176 135) respectively; P < 0·001) than those undergoing an open procedure. In multiple regression analysis, patients selected for a laparoscopic procedure had lower subsequent intervention rates for adhesions (odds ratio 0·80, 95 per cent c.i. 0·71 to 0·90; P < 0·001). DISCUSSION: Patients undergoing colorectal resection who are selected for the laparoscopic approach have a lower risk of developing clinically significant adhesions.
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to describe national intermediate-term admission rates for incisional hernia or clinically apparent adhesions following colorectal surgery, and to compare rates following laparoscopic and open approaches. METHODS:Patients undergoing primary colorectal resection between 2002 and 2008 were included from the Hospital Episode Statistics database. Subsequent inpatient admissions were extracted for up to 3 years after the initial operation or to the end of the study period. Outcomes examined were admissions with a diagnosis of, or operative interventions for, incisional hernia or adhesions. RESULTS: A total of 187 148 patients were included between 2002 and 2008, with median follow-up of 31·8 (interquartile range 13·1-35·3) months. Some 8885 (4·7 per cent) of these patients were admitted with a diagnosis of, or underwent a repair of, an incisional hernia. In multiple regression analysis, use of laparoscopy was not a predictor of operative intervention for incisional hernia (odds ratio 1·09, 95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 0·99 to 1·21; P = 0·083). Some 15 125 (8·1 per cent) of the patients were admitted with a diagnosis of adhesions or had a procedure for division of adhesions. Overall, 3·5 per cent (6637 of 187 148) of patients underwent adhesiolysis. Patients selected for a laparoscopic procedure had lower rates of admission for adhesions (6·3 per cent (692 of 11 013) for laparoscopic versus 8·2 per cent (14 433 of 176 135) for open surgery; P < 0·001) and reintervention for adhesions (2·8 per cent (305 of 11 013) versus 3·6 per cent (6325 of 176 135) respectively; P < 0·001) than those undergoing an open procedure. In multiple regression analysis, patients selected for a laparoscopic procedure had lower subsequent intervention rates for adhesions (odds ratio 0·80, 95 per cent c.i. 0·71 to 0·90; P < 0·001). DISCUSSION: Patients undergoing colorectal resection who are selected for the laparoscopic approach have a lower risk of developing clinically significant adhesions.
Authors: Demetrios Moris; Jeffery Chakedis; Amir A Rahnemai-Azar; Ana Wilson; Mairead Marion Hennessy; Antonios Athanasiou; Eliza W Beal; Chrysoula Argyrou; Evangelos Felekouras; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2017-07-06 Impact factor: 3.452